RAIPUR SECURITIES AND INVESTMENT LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), RAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issue

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaiआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 164/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Raipur Securities & Investment Ltd. Mig 21, Indravati Colony, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccr4419F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

penalty on capital gain on sale of land. The land was sold for a consideration of Rs, 15,36,834/- capital

SURESH CHAND SURANA,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 25/Rpr/2021) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17)

capital gains in the ratio of cost of new asset to the net consideration received on transfer is not chargeable to tax. The benefit was intended for investment in one residential house within India. Accordingly, it is proposed to amend the aforesaid sub-section (1) of section 54 so as to provide that the rollover relief under the said section

SMT BUDHAREEN BAI,BHATAPARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, BHATAPARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year : 2014-15 Smt. Budhia Reen Bai, Ito, Near Shitala Mandir, Bhatapara (Cg). Hathanipara Ward, Vs. Bhatapara (Cg) – 493118. Pan : Bxxpb0771Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vikash Sharma, Adv. Department By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing : 13-05-2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 14-05-2019 O R D E R Per Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Am :

Capital Gain. Penalty proceedings under section 271(1) (c) are separately initiated for concealment of income. 3.2 Appellant’s submission

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. AJAY GOLECHAA, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.454/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.)

penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer without appreciating that the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income by claiming bogus exemption under section 10(38) of the Act on account of long-term capital gains

VIJAY KRISHNA BHANDARI,BILASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.526/Rpr/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vijay Krishna Bhandari Mata Chowra Old Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G)-495 001 Pan: Akxpb0382P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bilaspur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

capital gain u/s. 45 of the Act. We are of the view that though the assessee had not participated in the appellate proceedings, but the CIT(Appeals) ought to have adverted to the facts involved in the case before him in the backdrop of the grounds based on which the impugned addition was assailed before him and adjudicated the said

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), BHILAI, BHILAI vs. MANISH KUMAR MEHTA, HUF, DURG

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.342/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Bhilai (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Manish Kumar Mehta Opportunity. Swami Atmanand English Medium School, Krishna Talkies Road, Risali, Bhilai (C.G.)-490 006 Pan: Aahhm3766Q ……""यथ" / Respondent

gain, the jammakharchi company clients earns short term capital loss and there is tax evasion at both the level. The only intention was to bring unaccounted wealth to book without paying taxes or evade paying taxes. It was only meant to- give a lucrative name to the company so that more beneficiaries can be attracted to the scheme

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(3), BHILAI, BHILAI vs. RAMANDEEP SINGH SOHI, DURG

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.268/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 The Income Tax Officer-1(3), Bhilai (C.G.)

penalty scrip namely, Ejecta marketing Ltd., & Appu Marketing & Manufacturing Ltd. during the F.Y. 2015-16 relevant to the A.Y. 2016-17. Accordingly, the case of the assessee for relevant year was reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) after obtaining prior approval from the appropriate authority. Notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued. Further

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI vs. ITO,WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without appreciating that the assessee has neither concealed any particulars of income nor furnished any inaccurate particulars thereof. The addition made on account of alleged capital gains

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI vs. ITO, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without appreciating that the assessee has neither concealed any particulars of income nor furnished any inaccurate particulars thereof. The addition made on account of alleged capital gains

PAWAN KUMAR CHANDRAKAR, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI vs. ITO, WARD-DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes as above

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos: 685, 686 & 687/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2015-16) Pawan Kumar Chandrakar, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward Dhamtari, Gandhi Chowk, Kurud, Shankardan Road, Village:Haraftarai, Dhamtari-493663, Chhattisgarh. Dhamtari-493773, Chhattisgarh. Pan: Aqdpc2033J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri Veekas S Sharma, Ca राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 12/03/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am:

penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without appreciating that the assessee has neither concealed any particulars of income nor furnished any inaccurate particulars thereof. The addition made on account of alleged capital gains

RAJESH AGRAWAL,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 45/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rajesh Agrawal C/O. Goyal Traders, Gudiyari, Raipur-492 009 Pan : Acjpa4635J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

Capital Gain Rs.1,38,579 On a perusal of the details it was observed by the A.O that the assessee a/w another co-owner, viz. Smt. Chanda Devi Agrawal had claimed to have incurred an expenditure of Rs. 13 lacs on the development of the 5 Rajesh Agrawal Vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Raipur land that was sold. It was noticed

M/S SHARDA ENERGY & MINERALS LIMITED,RAIPUR (CG) vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF IMCOME TAX, CENTRALCIRCLE-1,RAIPUR-2, RAIPUR (CG)

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Ram Lal Negi)

penalty by Rs. 9597422/-. The relevant observations of the CIT(A) read as under:- “The book profit since includes in the accounts of the assessee also the short term capital gain

RAIPUR SECURITIES & INVESTMENT LIMITED,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of my aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.104/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Raipur Securities & Investment Ltd. Mig 21, Indravati Colony, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaccr4419F .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

capital gain income from sale of land by the appellant in its return of income. As per the appellant company the director of the company did not provide sale documents to the AR for including the same in the return of income. What so ever may be the reason the income has escaped assessment. As per the assessment order

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(3),, RAIPUR vs. SMT. RACHNA DEVI SADHWANI L/H OF LATE SHRI KALYAN DAS SADHWANI, RAIPUR

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed, with no order as to cost

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No. 15/Blpr/2012 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2003-2004

gain u/s 68 of the Act. 4.2 Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of assessment, the respondent assessee filed an appeal before the Ld CIT(A) challenging the action of Ld AO, wherein the Ld CIT(A) considering the facts and evidential material laid during the course of assessment proceedings, overturned the assessment order in its entirety. 4.3 Against this first

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1(1)BILASPUR, BILASPUR(CG) vs. THE SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD., BILASPUR, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

capital gains and income from other sources. 12 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases (On penalty) Thus, under each head

SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), BILASPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

capital gains and income from other sources. 12 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases (On penalty) Thus, under each head

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), BILASPUR vs. SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED, BILASPUR

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

capital gains and income from other sources. 12 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases (On penalty) Thus, under each head

SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD.,,BILASPUR(CG) vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1(1), BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

capital gains and income from other sources. 12 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases (On penalty) Thus, under each head

THE SOUTH EASTERN COAL FIELDS LTD., BILASPUR,BILASPUR(CG) vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE , 1(1)BILASPUR, BILASPUR(CG)

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

capital gains and income from other sources. 12 South Eastern Coalfields Group of cases (On penalty) Thus, under each head